The Second Thoughts of an Idle FellowJerome, Jerome K. (Jerome Klapka)
General
The Second Thoughts of an Idle Fellow
Jerome, Jerome K. (Jerome Klapka)
English essays; English wit and humor
He did not expatiate further. In his excitement he had laid his hand
upon the thing, with the natural result that it collapsed. More by
accident than design I caught the jug in my arms. I also caught the
water it contained. The basin rolled on its edge and little damage was
done, except to me and the soap-box.
I could not pump up much admiration for this washstand; I was feeling too
wet.
“What do you do when you want to wash?” I asked, as together we reset the
trap.
There fell upon him the manner of a conspirator revealing secrets. He
glanced guiltily round the room; then, creeping on tip-toe, he opened a
cupboard behind the bed. Within was a tin basin and a small can.
“Don’t tell the old boy,” he said. “I keep these things here, and wash
on the floor.”
That was the best thing I myself ever got out of egg-boxes—that picture
of a deceitful son stealthily washing himself upon the floor behind the
bed, trembling at every footstep lest it might be the “old boy” coming to
the door.
One wonders whether the Ten Commandments are so all-sufficient as we good
folk deem them—whether the eleventh is not worth the whole pack of them:
“that ye love one another” with just a common-place, human, practical
love. Could not the other ten be comfortably stowed away into a corner
of that! One is inclined, in one’s anarchic moments, to agree with Louis
Stevenson, that to be amiable and cheerful is a good religion for a
work-a-day world. We are so busy _not_ killing, _not_ stealing, _not_
coveting our neighbour’s wife, we have not time to be even just to one
another for the little while we are together here. Need we be so
cocksure that our present list of virtues and vices is the only possibly
correct and complete one? Is the kind, unselfish man necessarily a
villain because he does not always succeed in suppressing his natural
instincts? Is the narrow-hearted, sour-souled man, incapable of a
generous thought or act, necessarily a saint because he has none? Have
we not—we unco guid—arrived at a wrong method of estimating our frailer
brothers and sisters? We judge them, as critics judge books, not by the
good that is in them, but by their faults. Poor King David! What would
the local Vigilance Society have had to say to him? Noah, according to
our plan, would be denounced from every teetotal platform in the country,
and Ham would head the Local Vestry poll as a reward for having exposed
him. And St. Peter! weak, frail St. Peter, how lucky for him that his
fellow-disciples and their Master were not as strict in their notions of
virtue as are we to-day.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account